Coates v. Holden
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1931, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The venue of this transitory action, commenced in Hennepin county, was, pursuant to statute (G. S. 1923 [2 Mason, 19271 § 9215) summarily changed to Stearns county. There plaintiff moved to remand to Hennepin and submitted affidavits in support of his claim that when the action ivas commenced defendant was a resident of Hennepin. Defendant made a contrary showing and thereby raised an issue of fact, which will not be reviewed here.
In such a case our examination of the record goes only to the extent of determining Avhether there was an issue of fact. If there is one, the decision of the district court is final. State ex rel. Perkins v. District Court, 155 Minn. 505, 193 N. W. 169; State ex rel. Ryan v. A. Guthrie & Co. Inc. 164 Minn. 525, 205 N. W. 448.
The alternative writ of mandamus should be discharged.
So ordered.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.